TR Forums

End User wrote:

Chrispy_ wrote:

The situation where AMD has an advantage is gaming whilst streaming, because Intel stops (affordably) at four cores, whilst the FX-8350 can run a four-thread game and encode/upload your video stream on the fly without taking such a significant performance hit.

There is no advantage for AMD. The exact opposite is true. The FX-8350 is destroyed by a quad 3770K when encoding/gaming.

To be fair these results have little relevance to a real world usage such as playing the game and streaming your play on Twitch.tv using something like OBS software. Though I believe that even using OBS the Intel's solution would be superior

just brew it! wrote:

End User wrote:

The FX-8350 is destroyed by a quad 3770K when encoding/gaming.

As it should be, given that the FX-8350 is less than 2/3 the price of the 3770K...

That discussion was purely about performance.

End User wrote:

just brew it! wrote:

End User wrote:

The FX-8350 is destroyed by a quad 3770K when encoding/gaming.

As it should be, given that the FX-8350 is less than 2/3 the price of the 3770K...

That discussion was purely about performance.

...there's no such thing . We want to talk about performance, we move to an overclocked Ivy-E setup. And hell, that's only about $300 more than a top-end Haswell setup, and potentially over 50% faster; that's more than you'll ever get overclocking something else, and well over twice as fast as AMD's fastest (in a consumer socket). And yeah, games can use those cores quite well.

just brew it! wrote:

End User wrote:

The FX-8350 is destroyed by a quad 3770K when encoding/gaming.

Yes, for gaming the i5-2400 is indeed a better choice at the $200 price point. If the primary use wasn't gaming, then the picture would be less clear since the FX-8350 beats the i5-2400 at non-gaming tasks...

Yea i originally intended to set up a i7-3770 but i think after hearing what you guys have to say, ill probably put a i5-2400 or higher, depending on what graphics card and other stuff he wants, thank you all for your help

End User wrote:

just brew it! wrote:

End User wrote:

The FX-8350 is destroyed by a quad 3770K when encoding/gaming.

As it should be, given that the FX-8350 is less than 2/3 the price of the 3770K...

That discussion was purely about performance.

If you're eliminating price from the equation, then why stop at the 3770K? Just go for the 4960X.

Airmantharp wrote:

We want to talk about performance, we move to an overclocked Ivy-E setup.

We are talking about quad core Intel CPUs. The i7-4820K is as slow as a 3770K.

f you're eliminating price from the equation, then why stop at the 3770K? Just go for the 4960X.

The discussion centred around quad core Intel CPUs.

End User wrote:

That discussion was purely about performance.

End User wrote:

The discussion centred around quad core Intel CPUs.

Is it purely about performance, or is it about quad core Intel CPUs?

.

clone wrote:

would your friend be interested in overclocking?... if yes make sure it's a "K" series cpu, if no then just grab the less spendy i5 model.

I will probably go with the non-k i5 cuz i dont think he could even figure out hypethreading...but thats why im helping him build it lol

just brew it! wrote:

End User wrote:

That discussion was purely about performance.

End User wrote:

The discussion centred around quad core Intel CPUs.

Is it purely about performance, or is it about quad core Intel CPUs?

That discussion was purely about the performance of quad core Intel CPUs.

If your friend is not into overclocking then you should consider a Has well based chip instead of the Ivy based chips.

If money no issue then go with Intel, Intel is better deal. I just recently brought AMD FX 9590 4.7/5GHZ from overclockers.co.uk for about 340.00 US dollars with shipping included. Just make sure you get a all-in-one cpu water cooler for it. Processor works great.

srgramrod wrote:

just brew it! wrote:

End User wrote:

The FX-8350 is destroyed by a quad 3770K when encoding/gaming.

Yes, for gaming the i5-2400 is indeed a better choice at the $200 price point. If the primary use wasn't gaming, then the picture would be less clear since the FX-8350 beats the i5-2400 at non-gaming tasks...

Yea i originally intended to set up a i7-3770 but i think after hearing what you guys have to say, ill probably put a i5-2400 or higher, depending on what graphics card and other stuff he wants, thank you all for your help

Heck if you are going to use a 1155 i5 2400 you might as well get a 2500k for 180$ from starmicro and add a 25-30$ coolermaster hyper 212 evo cooler then you have a cooler running chip then IVY and should be able to hit 4.5 ghz with ease on a half decent z77 motherboard. Sure sandy bridge CPU's are 5% to maybe 10% slower clock for clock then a Ivy chip but it overclocks higher then most IVY's since Ivy chips run really hot. But cooling a sandy chip is much much easier then a ovrclocked Ivy bridge chip. The 2500k is no slouch as I am sure many people here still using them are very very happy with them still and have no reason to upgrade. My 2600k is here to stay for a long time. Until PCI-e 2.0 bottlenecks a GPU 2 to 3 years from now it might just be time to upgrade.

vargis14 wrote:

Heck if you are going to use a 1155 i5 2400 you might as well get a 2500k for 180$ from starmicro and add a 25-30$ coolermaster hyper 212 evo cooler then you have a cooler running chip then IVY and should be able to hit 4.5 ghz with ease on a half decent z77 motherboard. Sure sandy bridge CPU's are 5% to maybe 10% slower clock for clock then a Ivy chip but it overclocks higher then most IVY's since Ivy chips run really hot. But cooling a sandy chip is much much easier then a ovrclocked Ivy bridge chip. The 2500k is no slouch as I am sure many people here still using them are very very happy with them still and have no reason to upgrade. My 2600k is here to stay for a long time. Until PCI-e 2.0 bottlenecks a GPU 2 to 3 years from now it might just be time to upgrade.

He already said his buddy doesn't overclock or know much about computers. It makes more sense, in more than one way, to get an i5 Haswell when running at stock.

In addition to stock, I'd even suggest an S model instead of a K.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819116897

just brew it! wrote:

If you're building from scratch (i.e. not re-using an existing AMD motherboard), and aren't on a tight budget, Intel is a much better choice for gaming these days.

those are over...now for gaming AMD is the best....

I just switched from a FX8150 to a quad-core i5 4670 myself.

The recent Pentium at 4.8Ghz makes a pretty serious mockery of AMD at the moment.

I can count on one hand the number of programs that are truly not bottlenecked by the speed of one main thread, and those are usually software renderers or encoders rather than something an everyday consumer is going to care about. The fact that Intel hasn't released 6-core chips into the mainstream yet is because they just wouldn't sell that well. Apart from us enthusiasts who want bigger numbers, duallies with HT do a pretty good impression of a 16-core Xeon workstation for everyday tasks, gaming and, well, pretty much everything that isn't professional graphics or compute.

Here's hoping that AMD's next architecture isn't so focussed on core count. We still need high per-thread performance even a decade after the first multicore processors went mainstream....

I'm the happy owner of an FX-8350 rig myself since December 2012. Apart from its power consumption numbers, I'm perfectly happy with my FX, although it's not like the FX will drive my power bill through the roof. I plan to stick with it for a long time, seeing as CPU performance isn't really going anywhere far enough and how more and more apps are becoming highly-threaded to utilize those 8 integer cores. Considering the fact that you can get the FX-8350 for about half the price of a 3770K or 4770K, you gotta give AMD a lot of kudos. It's a fantastic CPU for the price and should satisfy all but the most demanding users.

Here's a video I dug up on YouTube. The guy who made it apparently has owned an FX-8350 and upgraded to a 3770K. See what he has to say about it.

Then here's another video about how AMD is better than Intel. I'm sure your fanboy-detector is going crazy right about now.

And just so people won't say we're too biased towards AMD, here's another guy who went from an FX-8350 to a Core i7.

I still build AMD machines but only because they're the lowest-cost entry to proper ECC support; Useful for master nodes in a render farm where you don't need a full-on server for the job.
I'd also consider an AMD for non-gaming purposes, but even then the Pentium is mighty capable for a lot less outlay.

Chrispy_ wrote:

I still build AMD machines but only because they're the lowest-cost entry to proper ECC support; Useful for master nodes in a render farm where you don't need a full-on server for the job.

They're not bad for building servers on the cheap (i.e. using desktop parts) either. That's all gonna change once AM3+ gets phased out though, since the memory controllers in the APUs don't have ECC support.

@ronch
I can agree with the guy in the first video you linked. I wouldn't recommend anybody "upgrade" from an FX 8350 to an i7 either. The thing I don't agree with is the fact that he's implying that the 8350 and i7 are competitors in terms of gaming....they're not. In fact, if you're gaming, there's no reason to buy more than an i5 which is the real competitor for the FX 8350.

I'm appalled that you linked the second video. That guy doesn't deserve to have his fanboy/misinformed video getting publicity anywhere. It really needs to sink into the darkness of the youtube archive. I'm not an AMD or Intel fanboy, I buy whatever offers best price/performance, but listening to that guy run his mouth literally made me angry. If only you could e-slap someone...
**My "favorite" quote in that video: "if you buy an APU there's no need to get a $200-$250 discrete GPU because there's already one in [the CPU]..." ugh

I do like putting AMD A8 APUs in low-budget gaming builds. It's nice that they have 4 cores for "future-proofing." However, as soon as you start talking about a dGPU, my recommendations go to Intel i3 or greater. The FX 6350 is a reasonable consideration in terms of core count and frequency compared to an i3 (at the sacrifice of significantly higher power draw), but AM3+ has grown long in the tooth and single-threaded performance is still very important, even in today's "multi-threaded" world.

Based on the fact that AMD has no plans of releasing Steamroller or Excavator CPU, or a successor of AM3+, it's quite likely that they decided to focus on servers, mobile, and low-end desktops.

If the recent rumors about Carrizo getting stacked DRAM turns out to be true, then memory bandwidth bottleneck isn't going to be an issue for the APU anymore.

Though Broadwell desktop will show up during 2015 fall, which means if Carrizo desktop is fully launched during 2015 spring (not paper launched during the winter), then it would mean Haswell refresh going up against Carrizo for 6 months.